Proposal for Stop Row Enrichment in Data Management

Mathew Iacone · 2024-12-17 02:34:44.316584+00

Would be great if you could add a "Stop row" enrichment. You set a condition (based on some previous value) and if true, nothing to the right of that column runs. Kind of like a "return" statement in a function. Much simpler than having to manage cascading dependencies all the way down the row.

Proposal for Stop Row Enrichment in Data Management | Clay

7 comments

· Sorted by Oldest

Bruno (Clay)
·
·
Hi Mathew, thanks for reaching out. Taking a look at this now!
Bruno (Clay)
·
·
You should be able to implement what you're describing here with our AI formulas feature - this allows you to set up conditional runs with javascript snippets, which allow you to disqualify specific enrichments from running if certain conditions are not met. Just recorded this quick video to show you how you can set this up: https://www.loom.com/share/0631544257004e00932451f2f8001b9d?sid=52086a9d-c7f1-46c6-803c-f59b64a22977 I hope this was helpful. If there's anything else I can assist you with, please let me know!
Mathew Iacone
·
·
Thanks Bruno. I’m very familiar with adding run conditions. My point is slightly different. For example, let’s say you have a table that takes in a company name and company owner. The table searches an external DB to see if that record exists. If it does, we update the company owner in the external DB. If it does not, we run enrichments 1-6 and create the record in our DB. For a flow like this, I need to add run conditions to all 6 enrichments in case 2 to make sure they don’t run if the record exists. It would be much simpler if I could tell my table — if this column is true, stop ALL dependent enrichments vs. adding run conditions to every individual one Does that make sense?
owen (Clay)
·
·
Hey Mathew, thanks for reaching out! That’s a great point and valuable feedback. The challenge with that alternative lies in autonomously defining what 'dependent' means across every user’s unique workflow. In this case, setting up individual conditional formulas is the workaround. While this might take an extra minute, it offers an exceptional level of flexibility for customizing your workflow. Let me know if you need any further guidance, I’m happy to help!
Mathew Iacone
·
·
Thanks Owen, but you wouldn't need to autonomously define dependencies. The "Stop enrichment" column would freeze the runs for ALL columns to the right of it. This is much easier than having to include a "run if" for every column to the right. It's like coding a function. If you include a return statement, the function stops.
owen (Clay)
·
·
Of course, makes sense! We appreciate the feedback and will share this with our team to keep this in mind moving forward. :) Let me know if you have any other questions, concerns, or how else we can assist!
Channeled
APP
·
·
Hi Mathew Iacone! This thread was recently closed by our Support team. If you have a moment, please share your feedback:

Bruno (Clay)
·
·
Hi Mathew, thanks for reaching out. Taking a look at this now!
Bruno (Clay)
·
·
You should be able to implement what you're describing here with our AI formulas feature - this allows you to set up conditional runs with javascript snippets, which allow you to disqualify specific enrichments from running if certain conditions are not met. Just recorded this quick video to show you how you can set this up: https://www.loom.com/share/0631544257004e00932451f2f8001b9d?sid=52086a9d-c7f1-46c6-803c-f59b64a22977 I hope this was helpful. If there's anything else I can assist you with, please let me know!
Mathew Iacone
·
·
Thanks Bruno. I’m very familiar with adding run conditions. My point is slightly different. For example, let’s say you have a table that takes in a company name and company owner. The table searches an external DB to see if that record exists. If it does, we update the company owner in the external DB. If it does not, we run enrichments 1-6 and create the record in our DB. For a flow like this, I need to add run conditions to all 6 enrichments in case 2 to make sure they don’t run if the record exists. It would be much simpler if I could tell my table — if this column is true, stop ALL dependent enrichments vs. adding run conditions to every individual one Does that make sense?
owen (Clay)
·
·
Hey Mathew, thanks for reaching out! That’s a great point and valuable feedback. The challenge with that alternative lies in autonomously defining what 'dependent' means across every user’s unique workflow. In this case, setting up individual conditional formulas is the workaround. While this might take an extra minute, it offers an exceptional level of flexibility for customizing your workflow. Let me know if you need any further guidance, I’m happy to help!
Mathew Iacone
·
·
Thanks Owen, but you wouldn't need to autonomously define dependencies. The "Stop enrichment" column would freeze the runs for ALL columns to the right of it. This is much easier than having to include a "run if" for every column to the right. It's like coding a function. If you include a return statement, the function stops.
owen (Clay)
·
·
Of course, makes sense! We appreciate the feedback and will share this with our team to keep this in mind moving forward. :) Let me know if you have any other questions, concerns, or how else we can assist!
Channeled
APP
·
·
Hi Mathew Iacone! This thread was recently closed by our Support team. If you have a moment, please share your feedback: